1 |
On 11/07/16 13:46, Alec Warner wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:23 AM, Sven Vermeulen <swift@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 06:32:59PM -0800, Alec Warner wrote: |
5 |
>>> The foundation currently has 1 member type (in the bylaws) but Gentoo |
6 |
>>> itself still seems to have 2 (Gentoo staff and Ebuild developer) |
7 |
>>> This motion represents an idea that the community itself would only |
8 |
>>> have 1 contributor type. |
9 |
>>> 1) Contributors must take the staff quiz (which we should rename to |
10 |
>> the |
11 |
>>> contributor quiz.) |
12 |
>>> 2) Contributors are encouraged to be foundation members, but |
13 |
>> membership |
14 |
>>> is not required. We may amend the contributor onboarding process to |
15 |
>>> offer foundation membership at the time they join Gentoo as a |
16 |
>>> contributor. |
17 |
>>> 3) Contributors that want access to the gentoo ebuild repository still |
18 |
>>> need to follow the normal recruiting process (ebuild quiz, mentor, 30 |
19 |
>>> day period.) |
20 |
>>> 4) Contributors that do not want access to the gentoo ebuild |
21 |
>> repository |
22 |
>>> (because they contribute in other ways) do not need to take the ebuild |
23 |
>>> quiz. Its unclear if a 30 day grace period is required for non-ebuild |
24 |
>>> groups. |
25 |
>>> 5) Existing developers and staff are rebranded as contributors. |
26 |
>>> If approved, I expect a few months of working with comrel to adjust |
27 |
>>> existing policy documents and recruiting guidelines to implement. |
28 |
>> |
29 |
>> The difference between Staff and Developer is "merely" that a Developer has |
30 |
>> access to the Portage tree (and as such can influence system behavior of |
31 |
>> Gentoo users). Staff are still developers, they work on other aspects of |
32 |
>> the |
33 |
>> distribution, such as core documentation, infrastructure, release |
34 |
>> engineering, forum maintenance, etc. |
35 |
>> |
36 |
>> I would not appreciate an intake for contributors. Many wiki contributors |
37 |
>> (which offer a wealth of documentation information) would be affected by |
38 |
>> this, which they will see as bureaucratic stuff. Same with proxy maintained |
39 |
>> packages. Those contributors are no staff, yet they provide valuable |
40 |
>> improvements to Gentoo. |
41 |
>> |
42 |
> |
43 |
> I'm not suggesting we intake for wiki contributors (for the same reason |
44 |
> there is no intake for forum members, or irc channels.) I think there |
45 |
> should be intake for administrators. So Forums-mods should take the |
46 |
> developer quiz, as should wiki administrators, pr people, irc ops, bugzilla |
47 |
> admins, etc. |
48 |
> |
49 |
What possible reason would there be for requiring forum moderators, wiki |
50 |
administrators, irc ops, people doing PR work, bugzilla administrators, |
51 |
or anyone else not doing ebuild work, to take the developer quiz set? |
52 |
All of those positions, when necessary, already use staff recruiting |
53 |
because detailed knowledge of ebuild development and maintenance is |
54 |
utterly irrelevant to their work. |
55 |
|
56 |
If you want to require the full developer quiz set for work on |
57 |
officially supported overlays, regardless of gentoo.git access, there is |
58 |
at least a coherent argument to be made. But for positions that involve |
59 |
no ebuild work, it is at best pointless. |
60 |
|
61 |
> |
62 |
>> |
63 |
>> If we would want to align Gentoo Project user-types and Foundation, then we |
64 |
>> are moving the project management into Foundation space a bit. Currently, |
65 |
>> the Foundation has always tried not to meddle within this. I am not opposed |
66 |
>> to making things a bit easier for both though (for instance, all staff and |
67 |
>> developers are automatically Gentoo Foundation members). |
68 |
>> |
69 |
> |
70 |
> I want to handle foundation membership on a separate thread, if you would ;) |
71 |
> |
72 |
> -A |
73 |
> |
74 |
> |
75 |
>> |
76 |
>> Wkr, |
77 |
>> Sven Vermeulen |
78 |
>> |
79 |
>> |
80 |
> |